Meyer v. Nebraska (1923)
Meyer v. Nebraska marks the first case in where the Supreme Court intervened in the United States educational system. In this case, a statute that prohibited the “teaching of modern foreign languages to students who had not passed the eighth grade”1. The rational for this statute was to promote civil values and indoctrinate students in American ideals. As a result of the legal challenge, the statute was struck down, as the Supreme Court found that it violated the Constitutional rights of the teachers, parents, and students. The impact of this ruling is that the court established that states and localities have control over education but that control was not without limits. Additionally, the impact of this case also established parents’ rights to control the upbringing of their children which helped to determine other famous cases such as Pierce v. Society of Sisters(1925), Wisconsin v. Yoder(1972), and Davis v. Page(1974).
As we can see, the impact of this case is somewhat hypocritical. First, schools cannot infringe on constitutional rights of teachers, parents, or students. However, parents have the right to control the upbringing of their children, even when it may infringe on the rights of students or teachers? This is clearly and issue in the ruling that paves the way for challenges on books in libraries and in classrooms. Do children have the right to seek out information freely at schools or do parents’ rights overrule that, allowing them to censor material? This question is one the court must determine following Meyer v. Nebraska.
Ginsberg v. New York (1968)
In this Case, Ginsberg is convicted of selling inappropriate material (magazines) to minors which violated New York law at the time. He argues that this is a restriction on free speech and press by the state which violates the constitution. However, the court ruled that based on previous cases involving “obscenity laws”, states did have the right to restrict content that minors could access based on vulgarity of content2. Therefore, states have the right to regulate minors’ access to materials based on vulgarity, nudity, and other obscenities. This opens the door to regulation within schools.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
Students in Des Moines Independent Community School District were suspended for wearing black arm bands representing a protest of America’s involvement in the Vietnam War. When this case reached the court, the court ruled that suspension infringed upon the students rights to free speech, and placing a clear limit on what a school district can and cannot regulate in schools3. With regards to students freedom of speech, this cases confirmed that schools could not infringe on that right.
Pico v. Board of Education
Pico v. Board of Education4 is one of the earliest court cases (1976) surrounding censorship. The premise of this case is that the Island Trees Board of Education removed nine books from the school district library after complaints were made about them by a conservative parent group. The books were described as “anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and just plain filthy”, and needed to be removed to “protect students from moral danger”5. Students challenge that their constitutional rights were infringed upon and the books were not removed for their educational value or appropriateness but because of the school boards social, political, and moral views.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the students, stating that the students have the first amendment right to “receive information and ideas”5 and that texts could not be removed based off of ideas school boards dislike but rather for vulgar or age appropriate material. While this was a win for defenders of books, this opinion detailed how challenges surrounding books in school libraries could be modeled in the future to be successful. Successful challenges that have followed have very carefully framed arguments in terms of educational suitability rather than with respect to one viewpoint over another.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
Hazelwood High School students wrote articles about pregnancy and impact of divorce on students in the student newspaper as part of an assignment for their journalism class. The school principal objected to the pregnancy articles because he was concerned that students in the article, while antonymous, could be identified and did not approve of an article that discussed birth control and sexual activity. He vetoed the divorce article because it directly named two parents. Responding to this act of censorship, the Supreme Court ruled that “the First Amendment rights of students in public schools are not the same rights as an adult’s in a public setting.”6 Because the newspaper was technically a part of the school curriculum, the teachers and administrators are allowed more control to teach students what lessons are designed to teach. This includes removing content that is too mature for students or “inconsistent with [the school’s] basic educational mission.”6
What this decision allowed was for more power to be given to schools in terms of censoring literature and textbooks from students. School boards, which shape curriculum now had the ability to remove texts and books from curriculums based on what they view as inappropriate for students. This may even conflict with the educational mission of the school but if the board deems materials inappropriate it doesn’t seem like the Supreme Court is willing to value the educational mission aspect more than appropriateness based on the court case Virgil v. School Board of Columbia (1989) decided by the Eleventh Circuit7. The gives unprecedented power to elected school board officials that have become very politicized.
1.Bowers, Kelly. “Banning Books in Public Schools: Board of Education v. Pico.” Pepperdine Law Review, vol. 10, no. 3, 1982-1983, pp. 545-578. HeinOnline.
2. 262 U.S. 390 (1923).
3. Huffman, John L; Trauth, Denise M. After Ginsburg and Tinker: Book Banning and Minors’ First Amendment Rights. Journalism Quarterly; Fall 1981; 58, 3; ERIC pg. 434
4.Pico vs. Board of Education. 80-2043 U.S. 853 (1982).
5.Kim, Robert. “Banning Books: Unlawful Censorship, or within a School’s Discretion?” Kappanonline.org, Apr. 2022, https://kappanonline.org/category/under-the-law/.
6.Brenyo, Michael. “[Censored]: Book Banning in the US Education System.” Journal of Law & Education, vol. 40, no. 3, July 2011, pp. 541–49. EBSCOhost, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=62530420&site=ehost-live.
7.Virgil V. Sch. Bd. of Columbia Co., Fla., 862 F.2d 1517, 1519 (11th Cir. 1989).